IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/2663.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Demand For Cigarettes and Restrictions on Smoking in the Workplace

Author

Listed:
  • Frank J. Chaloupka
  • Henry Saffer

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to empirically test the effect that restrictive clean air laws have on the level of smoking. Restrictive clean air laws refers to the laws which prohibit smoking in private workplaces as well as in public places. The data employed in this study consist of a time series of cross sections of the fifty states of the U.S., and Washington D.C., over the time period from 1975 through 1985, Since states where sentiment is strongly against cigarettes are more likely to pass a clean air law, endogeneity between cigarette demand and the clean air law is a problem. A two step estimation model is used to control for endogeneity. Both a single equation and a two equation model of cigarette demand were estimated. The single equation results indicate that a clean air law has a significant negative effect on cigarette demand. However, the two equation model indicates that cigarette demand has a significant negative effect on the probability of passing a clean air law. The results indicate that when endogeneity is controlled for the clean air law dose not have a significant effect on cigarette demand. This does not imply that the enactment of a clean air law would not reduce the level of smoking if such a law were imposed in all states, but rather that only states with low levels of smoking are able to pass restrictive clean sir laws.

Suggested Citation

  • Frank J. Chaloupka & Henry Saffer, 1988. "The Demand For Cigarettes and Restrictions on Smoking in the Workplace," NBER Working Papers 2663, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:2663
    Note: EH
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w2663.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rajeev Goel, 2008. "Smoking prevalence in the United States: Differences across socioeconomic groups," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 32(2), pages 195-205, April.
    2. Rajeev K. Goel & Michael A. Nelson, 2006. "The Effectiveness of Antiā€Smoking Legislation: A Review," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 325-355, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:2663. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.